Impact of an evidence-based training for educators on bystander intervention for the prevention of violence against LGBTI+ youth

The study addresses the lack of evidence-informed professional training for educators to prevent violence against LGBTI+ youth in formal and non-formal educational institutions. It investigates whether an evidence-based training on the upstander (bystander intervention) approach increases participants’ confidence, empowerment, and likelihood to transfer knowledge and skills to their professional contexts. Situated within decades of research on gender-based violence prevention, LGBTI+ issues, and bystander interventions, the research follows the communicative methodology aimed at social impact and dialogic co-creation with stakeholders. The training and assessment were conducted in Spain, Cyprus, Ireland, Denmark, and Belgium. The authors’ positionality aligns with promoting social transformation through egalitarian dialogue and acknowledges contemporary perspectives on gender identity, performativity, and alternative masculinities as part of the broader context and rationale for the intervention.

State of the art synthesizes several strands: - Violence against LGBTI+ youth and consequences: LGBTI+ youth, particularly intersex and trans individuals, experience physical, sexual, psychological, verbal, and microaggression-based violence across formal and non-formal educational contexts, with cyberbullying increasingly prevalent. Underreporting normalizes LGBTI+phobia, harms school climates, and leads to significant health (e.g., distress, suicidality) and educational consequences (lower performance, higher truancy). Policy contexts vary across Europe, with some regressions noted. - Evidence-based measures: Effective strategies center on victims and bystanders rather than aggressors, including clear policies, peer education, anti-discrimination protocols, supportive climates, adult allies, and access to services. Inclusive resources like GSAs show positive effects, particularly for trans youth. - Training for teachers and educators: Training is crucial for transforming school environments, yet evidence-based, impact-assessed training is scarce. Educator interventions model bystander behavior for students, but gaps persist in evaluating training impacts and in prevention focus. - Co-creation and community science: Involving end-users (youth, LGBTI+ communities) enhances relevance and effectiveness; co-created tools can include overlooked phenomena such as Isolating Gender Violence (IGV). Communicative methodology and advisory committees exemplify community-engaged research producing social impact. - Bystander intervention and dialogic model: Community-wide bystander approaches have strong impact. The Dialogic Model of Violence Prevention and Resolution emphasizes prevention, norm change, and socially valued upstander behavior, integrating components like friendship, protection of upstanders (to prevent IGV), language of desire, ideal love, non-trivialization of violence, new alternative masculinities, and education on consent. Identified research gap: Lack of evidence on the impact of co-created, evidence-based educator training that combines bystander intervention for the whole community with a focus on preventing violence against LGBTI+ youth. Objectives: assess training quality, applicability, and transfer; assess awareness and strategy knowledge; assess empowerment and intention to implement upstander interventions.

Design: Pre-experimental pretest–posttest design with a single group receiving the intervention. Mixed-methods data included online questionnaires (pre and post) and semi-structured communicative interviews. Intervention: A 10-hour training delivered in 2–3 sessions (2.5–4 hours each) plus individual tasks. Content drew from five co-created modules: 1) LGBTI+ concepts, realities, violence and consequences; EU legislation and strategic actions. 2) Violence in the digital era (in-depth). 3) Bystander intervention: benefits, barriers, and how to foster it in educational institutions. 4) Roots of violence and preventive socialisation of gender-based violence: friendship, addressing isolating violence, masculinities, consent, etc. 5) Community involvement and the Dialogic Model of Violence Prevention and Resolution; strategies to engage families and other agents. Pedagogy included dialogic, interactive teaching, practical activities (e.g., brainstorming protective strategies for upstanders), and individual final tasks to plan upstander actions at individual, group, or institutional levels. Four of eight events included reading a scientific article and conducting a pedagogical dialogic gathering. Trainers attended a prior “Train the Trainers” event. Advisory Committee (AC) co-created and validated content and methodology. Instruments: - Questionnaires (Google Forms), pre and post, translated into Danish, Greek, Dutch, Spanish, and English. Shared 16 initial items; post-test added 11 items. Included demographics; Likert items (1–6 scale), multiple-choice (Yes/No/Not sure and options), and open-ended questions (definitions, evidence-based practices, current upstander actions and impacts, and training learnings). - Semi-structured communicative interviews (n=12) in local languages focusing on personal empowerment, and past/present/future upstander actions with youth, colleagues, and institutions. Participants: Around 150 trainees across 8 national events; 118 responded to pre-test and 90 to post-test (all post respondents also did pre). 82.2% respondents from Spain and Cyprus; others from Ireland, Belgium, Denmark, and a few other countries. Gender identity: ~80% women, 15% men, 2.5% non-binary, 1.25% gender-fluid, 1.25% preferred not to say. Ages 18–66. Institutions included schools, universities, NGOs, LGBTI+ entities, and associations. Interviews: 12 key informants representing diverse roles across all countries. Procedure: Questionnaires completed during training sessions. Interviewees recruited from post-survey volunteers; informed consent obtained; interviews via videoconference (20–60 minutes), 1–3 months post-training. Ethics: AC co-designed instruments; translations ensured inclusivity. Procedures approved by the European Commission; anonymity and confidentiality maintained; informed consent obtained; participants could validate results/conclusions in the draft paper. Analysis: Questionnaire data compiled in Excel; interviews transcribed and manually coded. Inductive categories aligned with objectives: (1) Training assessment, (2) Awareness of LGBTI+ violence, (3) Awareness of evidence-based strategies, (4) Professional empowerment, (5) Impact on the workplace. Due to anonymity, individual pre–post matching was not possible; analyses compared group-level pre vs post.

Quantitative highlights: - Training assessment: Overall rating 9.1/10. Usefulness for developing upstander strategies mean 5.45/6. - Awareness and preparedness: Awareness of violence against LGBTI+ youth increased from 4.51 to 5.12 (1–6 scale). Preparedness to intervene increased from 3.61 to 4.81 (1–6 scale). Participants rated 5.35/6 that the training improved awareness of effective practices. - Knowledge of evidence-based practices: Share knowing any evidence-based practices rose from 30.7% (n=118 pre) to 67.8% (n=90 post). - Understanding of bystander/upstander: Pre (n=118): 28.8% yes, 31.3% not sure, 40% no; Post (n=90): 95.6% yes; 4.4% no/not sure. - Approach focus shift (Spanish subsample): Selecting “focus on the aggressors” dropped from 49.15% (pre) to 21.05% (post). - Empowerment and intent: 97.6% felt more confident to implement upstander actions after training. Intention to implement upstander actions averaged 5.51/6. Planned actions included: being upstanders themselves (94.7% Spanish), opening dialogue with colleagues (78.9% Spanish), opening dialogue with youth (84.2% Spanish), and reading/discussing training materials with colleagues (60.5% Spanish). Qualitative insights: - Participants valued access to rigorous, evidence-based content, which increased professional confidence and trust in the training. - Dialogic pedagogical gatherings were seen as effective, practical, and easily transferable; heterogeneous participant profiles enriched learning through dialogic methodology. - Training reframed strategies from focusing on aggressors to empowering bystanders and the broader community; participants recognized the need to protect upstanders from Isolating Gender Violence. - Educators reported increased critical appraisal of non-evidence-based training and emphasized sustained, dialogic, evidence-centered professional learning within institutions. - Empowerment extended beyond workplaces to personal contexts; trainees reported increased willingness and skills to intervene in daily situations and to build solidarity networks. - Planned institutional changes included prevention-focused climate-building, inclusion of families via mixed committees, integrating LGBTI+ dimensions into existing dialogic models, and developing university-level trainings; transferability noted to other minority groups and contexts.

Findings indicate that a co-created, evidence-based training focusing on bystander (upstander) intervention effectively enhances educators’ awareness, preparedness, and confidence to act against violence toward LGBTI+ youth. The significant increase in knowledge of bystander approaches and evidence-based practices, along with reduced endorsement of aggressor-focused strategies, demonstrates improved scientific literacy in selecting effective interventions. Participants’ empowerment is linked to the credibility of the scientific resources and the dialogic, community science pedagogy, which fostered ownership, safety, and transferability. Qualitative data show intentions and early plans for institutionalization (dialogic gatherings, mixed committees, integration into curricula and faculty onboarding), aligning with prior evidence that whole-community, prevention-oriented approaches are most impactful. The training also supported broader inclusion by involving heterosexual men and leveraging alternative masculinities to catalyze positive norms and leadership. The study contributes evidence to an identified gap: impact of co-created, evidence-based educator training merging bystander intervention with dialogic models specifically addressing LGBTI+ violence. Sustained networks formed post-project suggest potential for ongoing dissemination and scaling. Overall, the training addresses the research question positively by increasing empowerment and likelihood of transfer to professional contexts, setting the stage for broader social impact and safer educational environments.

Educators frequently lack rigorous, evidence-based training that links LGBTI+ issues with bystander intervention. This study shows that a co-created, dialogic, evidence-based training improves awareness, shifts focus from aggressors to empowering bystanders, increases confidence (97.6%), and strengthens intentions to implement upstander actions (mean 5.51/6). Participants valued open-access scientific resources and dialogic gatherings, facilitating replication and institutionalization. Policy and practice implications include implementing bystander-focused trainings, dialogic gatherings on LGBTI+ realities and successful actions, zero-violence brave clubs, and GSAs, involving all community agents to build safe, solidarity-based school climates. The Advisory Committee’s role and communicative methodology enhanced relevance, ethics, and impact. Future research should include long-term follow-up to assess sustained transfer and behavioral outcomes, expand instrument content (e.g., more evidence vs hoax items), and enable individual-level pre–post matching to quantify changes over time.

- Training dosage: 10-hour timeframe was too condensed; more time would allow deeper content and extended dialogic practice. - Measurement: Questionnaires lacked more items contrasting hoaxes vs evidence-based statements; anonymity prevented individual pre–post matching; thus only group-level comparisons were possible. - Follow-up: No long-term assessment; future studies should evaluate sustained transfer, upstander behavior changes, and violence reduction over time.